Forum Moderators: TheBryster
Bryce F.A.Q (Last Updated: 2024 Nov 08 7:02 am)
Attached Link: http://vray.info/assets/sib01.jpg
Hey, that came out GREAT!!! Very very close to this one using true GI. The only real difference is in render speed. The one using true GI only took 8 hours to calculate the irradience map, then about 2 minutes to render each frame of the animation after that was done (it's a flythrough animation).Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender
v2.74
System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB
GPU.
Yes, and also your render settings would be nice to view too. I think EVERYONE in this forum should take an interest in radiosty and other methods of GI calculations, since Bryce 6 will most likely have them available.
Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender
v2.74
System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB
GPU.
WOAH! Beautiful!
Available on Amazon for the Kindle E-Reader
All the Woes of a World by Jonathan Icknield aka The Bryster
And in my final hours - I would cling rather to the tattooed hand of kindness - than the unblemished hand of hate...
nice renders both of them 2 min for each frame wow you are rubing it in there he ? ;)
for
some free stuff i made
and
for almost daily fotos
The one without TA is dark and "cold"... which may be fine for certain things. I think it's definitely worth it to use TA in this case. Did you add "grain" to the first image in post, or is that some kind of artifacting as a result of using the TA? "nice renders both of them 2 min for each frame wow you are rubing it in there he ? ;)" Hehe... well, if Bryce 6 gets photon mapping and some speed enhancements, it should be able to do the same thing (fairly quick GI calcs). Something to possibly look forward to. ;-)
Tools : 3dsmax 2015, Daz Studio 4.6, PoserPro 2012, Blender
v2.74
System: Pentium QuadCore i7, under Win 8, GeForce GTX 780 / 2GB
GPU.
Attached Link: no TA 1 hour render
6 hours for the TA render or non TA? Hope you were talking about the TA.My only crit is that the ceiling is too bright, there is only light coming through the windows to light that area of the model. TA is a hard tool to weild. It seems that generally speaking it either brightens the scene too much or grains it out so to speak. Not to mention the render times. I think that generally speaking in bryce it's easier to just use many filler lights / rings / domes for a much faster render.
The link I posted above although nowhere near perfect was done in only 30 minutes and rendered in an hour. Certainly not 'true' GI or true ambience. And parts don't look quite right, but for the render times I'm starting to think that TA isn't always worth it.
One last Q, how'd you avoid fasceting wow bad spelling.. on the ceiling?
Message edited on: 09/10/2004 09:55
TA does look good and in the hands of a master can produce some stunning results If DAZ does nothing else other than decrease the render time so that we can render a 6 hour picture in 6 minutes, I'll be happy. I'd even be happy if 6 hours reduced to 60 minutes. At the moment, I lack the patience to render premium settings. I do feel that even when Pro-Render comes out, I'm not sure I'll have the pateince to wait a day for a render, no matter how good it looks. I might have to wait for Bryce 6 before trying Pro-Render to it's full potential. Even an 8 hour render I did the other day was really trying my patience. I even went out and mowed the lawn and then cleaned the kitchen. So my wife is probably one person who doesn't mind the render engine being slow. ;-)
---------
Phillip Drawbridge
Website
Facebook
I've just got to thinking about the top pic in this thread...It looks like a photograph, but what would complete the illusion would be something outside the main window, maybe a skyscaper/highrise building.....? con-trail, plane.....
Available on Amazon for the Kindle E-Reader
All the Woes of a World by Jonathan Icknield aka The Bryster
And in my final hours - I would cling rather to the tattooed hand of kindness - than the unblemished hand of hate...
Responses in order: maxxxmodelz: The only real difference is in render speed. You're not kidding! But Bryce is a slow renderer anyway, so it's no surprise that its stab at 'radiosity' takes an age. I did this test because of the opportunity to compare TA results with examples of radiosity, etc, at the cathedral competition website (and I think Bryce is amongst the best in that regard). A day and a half render is more than I'd normally be willing to put up with. twistedbolt the TA render "feels" better in my opinion. That's probably cos it is better ;-). The non-TA render was done purely to show how the exact same setup looks without TA, not as a complete look at what each method is capable of. maxxxmodelz: The one without TA is dark and "cold"... Indeed. But I think the relevant issue is the absolute darkness in most places. In a non-TA render the lights could be increased in intensity, and given a warm colour, but - importantly - the black areas would have remained completely black. Shadow ambience was 100% (nearly always is in my renders) and any surfaces not hit directly by lights would remain black - nada. True Ambient light bouncing is what illuminates the sidewalls and under the arches, etc. Did you add "grain" to the first image in post, or is that some kind of artifacting as a result of using the TA? The grain is due to using True Ambience at 64rpp (medium power ;-)). Using the highest setting would have resulted in a smoother appearance, but this thread wouldn't have happened until next week ;-). Normally I would have reduced the image size and in so doing the grain would have taken on the appearance of photographic film grain, adding to the reality. In this case I wanted to show the straight Bryce render, so it's full size, warts and all. The grain also allowed me to get away without using the bump channel, which adds to the render time. Ornlu 6 hours for the TA render or non TA? Hope you were talking about the TA. Nope, that's for the non-TA render I'm afraid (36 hours for the TA). There's six lights with premium effect soft shadows in a complex mesh. Maybe my computer is running slow. ; -) My only crit is that the ceiling is too bright, there is only light coming through the windows to light that area of the model. There are certainly faults with the image that I wouldn't have tolerated under normal circumstances. It was a case of judging overall composition as best as possible on a first render pass and then making a decision to go or not. Starting again wasn't an option once things got underway, especially as this is a 'technical' investigation. My spare time isn't that spare ;-). I think that generally speaking in bryce it's easier to just use many filler lights / rings / domes for a much faster render. I agree, and your images always demonstrate the potential of 'faking it' over 'doing it'. All else being equal, I would nearly always recommend people using Bryce as an art tool to use 'tricks' to 'fake' real world (and other) effects rather than spend time forcing Bryce to do it 'properly'. And I'd point to your images as evidence of the wisdom of that approach, since you are one of the best Brycers out there. But currently, my perverse pleasure in using Bryce is simply to explore what Bryce is capable of doing. It takes all sorts I suppose, but maybe someone can pick up something useful from these fiddlings. I was using light domes back in the days when Bryce2 and Pentium200s were all the rage. Once an extreme pervert, always an... The link I posted above although nowhere near perfect... Yeah, whaddaya playing at, coming in here with less than perfect? ;-) One last Q, how'd you avoid fasceting wow bad spelling.. on the ceiling? Oh, that was easy; I just didn't. It's there, but presumably its appearance is reduced 'sufficiently'. It doesn't seem any more obvious in your image, although the pillars do look unsmoothed. drawbridgep ...I'm not sure I'll have the pateince to wait a day for a render... On the other hand, you can have more than one instance of Bryce open at the same time with Bryce5, so it is possible to let a render chug away while getting on with other things, as I did with this one. Plus Bryce5 is very good at picking up a render after closing and opening a file, so it's fairly easy to schedule a long render around other important activities. TheBryster ...but what would complete the illusion would be something outside the main window, maybe a skyscaper/highrise building... The model does come with simple outside buildings (it's a whole complex) but I deleted them to have clear windows. Actually, to be 'photorealistic', having bright, 'washed out' windows is the correct approach. The exposure latitude of film generally isn't enough to provide for interior and exterior subjects to be properly lit at the same time (photographers and film makers will use filters to compensate if it is important enough). By convention, we tend to judge CGI work in comparison to photography, since both represent the 3D world seen by the eye/brain in a 2D format. In that context, my image would benefit from even more light saturation at the windows, plus some flaring, to bring it all together. And I've just thought of a way to do that in Bryce... Thanks for the compliments, comments and comparisons, all.
Pass no temptation lightly by, for one never knows when it may pass again!
I cut the effect of the radiosity back from the standard as I didn't want to get things too bright. Unless there are internal light sources in a building of this type, it is darker except for where the windows shine.
Personal opinion, I think bryce stands up very well in competition. I am afraid that I just love the extra speed in C4D as well as some of the finer controls.
Message edited on: 09/11/2004 07:51
Pass no temptation lightly by, for one never knows when it may pass again!
Cinema 4D, mostly to give a comparison of non and radiosity vs TA from Bryce. TA stands up pretty well but IMO needs to be dimmed a bit. Either that or there need to be some interior lights visually (candles lanterns, etc.) to justify the brightness. Based on shooting in several cathedrals, the interior is dim generally with awesome light from the windows. Usually there are several scores of internal lighting to bring up the interior for the congregation. As we have not used these in all our models/renders - I trimmed back the radiosity settings to try not to lose that feeling of dim. I don't remember if you can adjust TA in this manner. Anyone know?
Pass no temptation lightly by, for one never knows when it may pass again!
"I might have to wait for Bryce 6 before trying Pro-Render to it's full potential." (drawbridgep) Did I miss something while I was away for a few days? I'm a dumbo when it comes to lights, just don't understand the technicalities.....but of all the posted renders Ornlu's seems the warmest and most alive. A few shafts of light, and it would look like a warm photograph. Still, happy just to be eavesdropping and picking up crumbs of knowledge from underneath the masters' table ;o)
Incarnadine: TA stands up pretty well but IMO needs to be dimmed a bit... ...I don't remember if you can adjust TA in this manner. Anyone know? My image is as much a representation of my errors as it of what True Ambience can do. Much of the interior is too bright in relation to the light potential from the windows because I made a poor choice of light levels; and not due to any inherent fault of TA. As I stated above, I made a best assessment on the basis of first render passes and stuck with what looked best under those limiting circumstances. Restarting wasn't an option once the image began to become clear, due to the render time commitment involved. In this case, the illumination could be better balanced simply by reducing the intensity of the lights along the long ceiling. There would be no need to alter True Ambient levels at all. Reducing the ambient levels of materials is how you 'trim back' the effect of True Ambience. In the first image, levels are 100 percent. In my second image, levels are effectively at zero because I disabled True Ambience. This shows the range available. Based on shooting in several cathedrals, the interior is dim generally with awesome light from the windows. Yes, as I alluded to above, all these images would benefit from more light saturation at the windows to be 'photo-realistic'. With photography you could make the interior as light as you wanted by using longer exposure times. But the longer the exposure, the more light saturation at the windows there would be.
Attached Link: http://hdri.cgtechniques.com/~sibenik2/
Was in post 9 Has several formats and there are reference photos...no I'm not. I've just downloaded the .3ds version and the maps, but they are compressed into .rar files. The only decompressor I use is WinZip, and it refuses to work on these files. What to I need, and from where? Sorry, but general internet and stuff is not my strong point.
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
Peter, I can also understand those render-times. But I've got a problem...a big problem. I started to render my scene with PR, and guess what the estimate was after the first pass... ...over 8 days, and that was with only one light in the entire scene (the sun). There were no lights inside the building, I just can't understand this at all. There's gotta be something wrong somewhere, so until I find out what it is, I'll have to cop-out of doing a render this time :-( aaarrggghhh!!!
The wait can be horrific, but the outcome can be worse - pumeco 2006
This site uses cookies to deliver the best experience. Our own cookies make user accounts and other features possible. Third-party cookies are used to display relevant ads and to analyze how Renderosity is used. By using our site, you acknowledge that you have read and understood our Terms of Service, including our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy.
With the recent threads featuring Marko Dabrovnic's tremendous cathedral model, I thought I'd see if it would respond to True Ambience. I'm delighted to say it does:
Six lights with soft shadows. One 'parallel' outside to represent the sun; one in the tower-dome area; one in the altar area; and three along the ceiling arch. The rest of the lighting is via True Ambience at 64rpp. I'll post another later showing the scene without True Ambience.
Render time was about a day and a half - but there was plenty of other activity on this computer during that time, including further Bryce experiments (I love Bryce5).
Other than a slight crop each side, and jpeg compression, this is exactly how it came out of Bryce.